To prove the GCHQ slide could've been fake, getting John to fix the
   leak and stop calling me a liar. Same as I've said all along. How is
   that implausible?

   On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 5:08 PM, Razer <[1]Rayzer@riseup.net> wrote:

   Got it. Totally altruistic motivation...
   On 10/10/2015 01:46 PM, Michael Best wrote:

   "Any money" is still more than I'll make off this. My only compensation
   is a headache from ridiculous accusations.

   Any chance you hold this same standard to Snowden and consider his
   press coverage as
   "an ongoing for-profit commercial motivation as redistributor" for the
   NSA docs?
   Sent from my iPhone

   On Oct 10, 2015, at 16:39, Razer <[2]Rayzer@riseup.net> wrote:

   On 10/10/2015 01:35 PM, Michael Best wrote:

   Nope, laughing at someone who has no idea how little a media mention is
   worth in terms of money.

   Sent from my iPhone

   Yes I do and it depends on how much money you consider 'money'... For
   some, paying the rent is enough. Ask any artist or musician.
   RR

   On Oct 10, 2015, at 16:33, Razer <[3]Rayzer@riseup.net> wrote:

   Nervous laugh...
   On 10/10/2015 01:32 PM, Michael Best wrote:

     I say Best's name's appearance in DailyDot or
     any other media constitutes an ongoing for-profit commercial
     motivation
     as redistributor.

   HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

References

   Visible links
   1. mailto:Rayzer@riseup.net
   2. mailto:Rayzer@riseup.net
   3. mailto:Rayzer@riseup.net

   Hidden links:
   5. mailto:Rayzer@riseup.net